Menachos 15a

מנחות ט״ו ע״א

Menachot 15a

Learn Menachos 15a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Menachos 15a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Why רבי יהודה says אין קרבן ציבור חלוק, and how פיגול passes from an offering to its bread but not back

Overview

The amud opens with רב פפא's suggestion that רבי יהודה and the חכמים argue about an impure part of a קרבן ציבור because they disagree about whether the ציץ is מרצה on things that are eaten. רב הונא בריה דרב נתן, רב אשי and רבינא each knock this down. They point to the בזיכין, which are burned on the מזבח; to the קרבן פסח, where the people are impure; and to the loaves, where רבי יהודה never mentions the ציץ. רבי יוחנן concludes that רבי יהודה had a fixed tradition: אין קרבן ציבור חלוק. A new משנה then teaches that the תודה makes its bread פיגול, and the כבשים of שבועות make their bread פיגול, but never the reverse. The גמרא first tries רב כהנא's idea that the bread is called 'תודה'. It ends up explaining that the bread comes because of the animal (גלל), and shows why the משנה needed both cases. Finally, רבי אלעזר asks רב about a כזית of wrong intent split between the תודה and its bread. רב rules that the bread is פיגול and the תודה is not. The גמרא challenges this with a קל וחומר and begins quoting a ברייתא that questions this kind of קל וחומר, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (21)

1. StatementThe argument depends on whether the frontplate helps for eaten items
2. ChallengeThey argue even about items burned on the altar
3. ProofProof from the two bowls of frankincense
4. ChallengeA second challenge from the impure tribe and the קרבן פסח
5. Proofרבינא brings a משנה about the two loaves and the לחם הפנים
6. Challengeרבי יהודה should have mentioned the ציץ
7. Conclusionרבי יוחנן: a fixed tradition of רבי יהודה
8. StatementNew משנה: the תודה can make its loaves פיגול, but not the other way around
9. StatementThe same rule for the כבשים of עצרת and the two loaves
10. QuestionWhat is the reason for the one-way rule?
11. ResponseSuggestion: the loaves are called 'תודה'
12. ChallengeThen it should work in reverse too
13. ResolutionThe name goes only one way
14. ChallengeThe lambs case breaks this explanation
15. ResponseThe real reason: the bread comes because of the offering
16. StatementWhy the משנה needed both cases
17. Questionרבי אלעזר's question about half-and-half intent
18. QuestionNarrowing the question to the bread
19. Responseרב answers that the bread is פיגול
20. ChallengeA קל וחומר says the bread should not be פיגול
21. RejectionQuestioning whether this kind of קל וחומר works